Re: Google unveils blog search site
- From: Big Bill <kruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 15:47:17 GMT
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 09:12:47 GMT, catherine yronwode
<cat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Big Bill wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:23:33 +0100, mogga <di@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 19:01:04 -0500, Paul N Burke
>> ><webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>http://blogsearch.google.com/
>> >
>> >
>> >OK
>> >
>> >inurl:myblog.com shows the number of results but now searches for text
>> >form the blog are only found in the main google by sites referencing
>> >it.
>> >
>> >So the end of blogs I think... No point in using it for adding content
>> >if it'll not be in the search results...
>>
>> I'm waiting for ALL commercial sites to be farmed off to Froogle.
>> Where, really, they should be.
>
>If i were running google, i would be trying to go that route. The
>trouble is, Froogle is far too spotty to be of use to the consumer
>yet.
I've looked at it, like, twice. It's the content concept I approve of
so I have no real comment on the execution.
>As both a researcher and as a consumer, i would prefer the two sorts
>of data be separated. When i want to read about Orris Root, i do not
>want to see two dozen commercial sites offering Orris Root in the
>serps -- and when i want to search a source for Orris Root to carry
>in my shop, i do not want to see a hundred botanical books and
>university botany sites in the serps.
>
>There are crude work-arounds -- adding search terms like "lb.,"
>"oz.," "wholesale," "shipping," or "retail" for bring up commercial
>sites and adding "family" + "genus" + "species" to draw in the
>botany sites -- but there are no standards in place that guarantee
>that these work-arounds will not exclude valuable sites, so when a
>term can have both a commercial meaning and a "pure knowledge"
>meaning, i usually end up doing dozens of amplified or augmented
>searches on the term. I'm good at it -- but it is still a waste of
>my time.
>
>So here's a hint to google -- get froogle up and REALLY running --
>don't just limit it to shops that have shopping carts and can send
>data feeds -- let all places that actually sell products list at
>froogle -- and work on algos that catch terms like repeated use of
>the $ sign plus the presence of shopping cart software.
>
>Just mumbling to myself, as usual.
I listen. I got the FF DVDs the other day. I am one happy bunny. The
years roll back and I'm a kid again. Shame I can't actually read them
in the bath. Then I'd really be home.
BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Elvis does my SEO
--
.
- References:
- Google unveils blog search site
- From: Paul N Burke
- Re: Google unveils blog search site
- From: mogga
- Re: Google unveils blog search site
- From: Big Bill
- Re: Google unveils blog search site
- From: catherine yronwode
- Google unveils blog search site
- Prev by Date: Re: "Failure" in Google
- Next by Date: Re: 1-script
- Previous by thread: Re: Google unveils blog search site
- Next by thread: Re: Clone Domain
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
